Vegas Over Under on Hogs

[Porked Tongue]

6.5 is the number set by William Hill

Playing the Over is -150
Playing the Under is +130

I'd say that's a pretty good number.  I've already put $300(win $200) down on the over. 

[Porked Tongue]

Here's some more:

https://twitter.com/Covers/status/889674818160918529

[PorkSoda]

nice avi, have you considered a career in graphic design?

[JayBell]

Damnit, Vegas.  I feel really strongly that Arkansas gets to 8 or 9 wins this season, but this makes me doubt it more than anything else has.

After the Auburn debacle last year, it's going to be years before I get all uppity about Vegas lines again.

[MuskogeeHogFan]

Damnit, Vegas.  I feel really strongly that Arkansas gets to 8 or 9 wins this season, but this makes me doubt it more than anything else has.

After the Auburn debacle last year, it's going to be years before I get all uppity about Vegas lines again.

Don't let that bother you too much. They have to start somewhere and so much of that is heavily influenced by how the 2016 season ended. They have A&M at 6-1/2 and I don't think there is any way that they post that few wins.

[Poker_hog]

This line is almost exactly what our 3 year average is.  Vegas expects us to continue our remarkably consistent mediocrity.

[onebadrubi]

Damnit, Vegas.  I feel really strongly that Arkansas gets to 8 or 9 wins this season, but this makes me doubt it more than anything else has.

After the Auburn debacle last year, it's going to be years before I get all uppity about Vegas lines again.

One game dictates to you what a win total the next year does?  That sounds almost like a biased or agenda driven remark?

And if you want to use spread covers or lack of as evidence of Bielema and the Hogs not covering the 6.5 win spread, you will lose that fight.  Bielema has killed the spreads overall the last 3-4 years. 

[widespreadsooie]

One game dictates to you what a win total the next year does?  That sounds almost like a biased or agenda driven remark?

And if you want to use spread covers or lack of as evidence of Bielema and the Hogs not covering the 6.5 win spread, you will lose that fight.  Bielema has killed the spreads overall the last 3-4 years. 

I don't know if you remember that Auburn spread from last year but we we're getting 10 and every Joe and his mom pounded the Hogs. I think he's just saying when his gut disagrees with Vegas, be cautious.

[onebadrubi]

Not really.  In fact it's close to a wash. 

Bielema against the spread by year -
2013:  4-8   very bad year
2014:  10-3  very good year
2015:  8-5  another good year
2016:  5-8  another bad year

27-24 ATS record for the past 4 years.

Killing the spreads?

Well I gave him a pass for 2013, as I think most would when discussing that.  So yes I think most people would call 10-3 adn 8-5 killing it actually.  5-8 however last year not so well.  But I should have also included more of my thought there, he as a dog as well.  Also I was considering his Wisconsin runs, I am pretty sure he was doing well ATS while there as well.

And in fact if you are only counting those 4 years and factoring in the juice, it is a complete wash assuming you were only laying -110.

[Kevin]

it will be the same number next year, then the next year, till infinity

[jkstock04]

Not really.  In fact it's close to a wash. 

Bielema against the spread by year -
2013:  4-8   very bad year
2014:  10-3  very good year
2015:  8-5  another good year
2016:  5-8  another bad year

27-24 ATS record for the past 4 years.

Killing the spreads?

Last year was bad. I got hammered pretty hard on the Bama game...I thought we had the horses to cover 14.5 (I believe it was) points getting them at home. No where close. I won't bet on the Hogs again as long as Bielema is coach.

[onebadrubi]

Last year was bad. I got hammered pretty hard on the Bama game...I thought we had the horses to cover 14.5 (I believe it was) points getting them at home. No where close. I won't bet on the Hogs again as long as Bielema is coach.

Because one game?  Heck using that thought I should never bet ML either, games I've had large sums on ML that have paid off, TCU last year, Ole miss on the 4th and 25, and LSU in 2015 (17-0) and 2016 at LSU, along wtih Florida last year.  I don't usually play them when they are favorites because of the juice.  But Arkansas has been a very lively dog the last three years. 

From Memory I want at least 3 of those were +300. 

[hobhog]

I feel really good about the over..........

[Al Boarland]

In before someone says this is to get even money on both sides. These guys hit close to the win totals consistently.

[Al Boarland]

Well I gave him a pass for 2013, as I think most would when discussing that.  So yes I think most people would call 10-3 adn 8-5 killing it actually.  5-8 however last year not so well.  But I should have also included more of my thought there, he as a dog as well.  Also I was considering his Wisconsin runs, I am pretty sure he was doing well ATS while there as well.

And in fact if you are only counting those 4 years and factoring in the juice, it is a complete wash assuming you were only laying -110.

I don't care what situation you walk in on. Only winning 4 games should never be written off. Do I give that season a lot of weight big picture? No. However, it definitely happened and is inexcusable under any circumstances. Unless you have a narrative.

[HamSammich]

They nailed it. I've said for months we win 7 with a win against Alabama. CBB gets an extension.

[widespreadsooie]

They nailed it. I've said for months we win 7 with a win against Alabama. CBB gets an extension.

A win against Alabama? Lolololol.

[onebadrubi]

I don't care what situation you walk in on. Only winning 4 games should never be written off. Do I give that season a lot of weight big picture? No. However, it definitely happened and is inexcusable under any circumstances. Unless you have a narrative.

This thread is about spreads and covering, not W's and L's. So let's not make it that. 

[onebadrubi]

They nailed it. I've said for months we win 7 with a win against Alabama. CBB gets an extension.

Look what it got Freeze at Ole miss.  He was in line to be their Alvarez just cause he beat bama.

[Al Boarland]

This thread is about spreads and covering, not W's and L's. So let's not make it that.

7/8 wins including a bowl, IMO.

[daprospecta]

Damnit, Vegas.  I feel really strongly that Arkansas gets to 8 or 9 wins this season, but this makes me doubt it more than anything else has.

After the Auburn debacle last year, it's going to be years before I get all uppity about Vegas lines again.

Since I've moved away from Arkansas. My bias(not my love) has changed a bit.  I spent some time during the NBA Finals halftime and analyzed our schedule with a friend.  5-7 wins is the win range we came up with.  That is pre-bowl wins.  I bet that if most fans took away the "we are due to beat them" thoughts and think logically, they'd have a similar win range. 

[hawganatic]

In before someone says this is to get even money on both sides.

Trying to do an "in before" on a fact?  That is how betting lines work and how sports books make money.  Sports books stay in business by NOT gambling, hedging on both sides, and keeping the overhead on the bet.

[widespreadsooie]

Trying to do an "in before" on a fact?  That is how betting lines work and how sports books make money.  Sports books stay in business by NOT gambling, hedging on both sides, and keeping the overhead on the bet.

Someone always mentions it in a gambling thread, normally irrelevant to the topic but just trying to sound smart. I think that's why he said it.

[Killean]

Just keep in mind that the number isn't how Vegas thinks they'll do..


It's how they think that everybody else thinks they'll do

[Porked Tongue]

Vegas also set 1 page on this thread as the over under before people explained how Vegas works.

[redneckfriend]

Since I've moved away from Arkansas. My bias(not my love) has changed a bit.  I spent some time during the NBA Finals halftime and analyzed our schedule with a friend.  5-7 wins is the win range we came up with.  That is pre-bowl wins.  I bet that if most fans took away the "we are due to beat them" thoughts and think logically, they'd have a similar win range. 

In defense of optimism:

although there are a lot of bad away games on the schedule optimism lies in the hope(s) that 1) the O line is much better (a reasonable hope); 2) Whaley, and who ever, can continue, along with #1, a reasonable running game (a not unreasonable hope); 3) the wide receivers and tight ends provide some real play makers (a little more of a long shot than #s 1 and 2 but still very possible); 4) the defense can actually stop the little sisters of the poor and slow down an SEC team (a coin flip).

[HamSammich]

Just keep in mind that the number isn't how Vegas thinks they'll do..


It's how they think that everybody else thinks they'll do

Very very very very veeereryyyyy wrong. Vegas lines come from complex algorithms... the line moves as bets come in. The line that starts is usually pretty darn accurate. Try again bud.

[HamSammich]

A win against Alabama? Lolololol.

Win against Bama. I'll be here in a few months with the last laugh.

[widespreadsooie]

Very very very very veeereryyyyy wrong. Vegas lines come from complex algorithms... the line moves as bets come in. The line that starts is usually pretty darn accurate. Try again bud.

Man he's exactly right. Lines are set on public perception, that's a fact. It's not hard to put a number on a game when all you need is 50/50 action. Definitely doesn't require a complex algorithm. You should probably try again, bud.

[widespreadsooie]

Win against Bama. I'll be here in a few months with the last laugh.

I hope you do have that laugh, wouldn't want it any other way. I'll spot you 13 points right now if you'd like a friendly wager.

[HamSammich]

Man he's exactly right. Lines are set on public perception, that's a fact. It's not hard to put a number on a game when all you need is 50/50 action. Definitely doesn't require a complex algorithm. You should probably try again, bud.

No. I have friends that write the algorithms. Public perception is not in the formula. That's why the lines move after bets come it. Research it if you doubt me. I actually am done with this and don't care what you guys continue to believe.

[CFB_Fanatic]

In defense of optimism:

although there are a lot of bad away games on the schedule optimism lies in the hope(s) that 1) the O line is much better (a reasonable hope); 2) Whaley, and who ever, can continue, along with #1, a reasonable running game (a not unreasonable hope); 3) the wide receivers and tight ends provide some real play makers (a little more of a long shot than #s 1 and 2 but still very possible); 4) the defense can actually stop the little sisters of the poor and slow down an SEC team (a coin flip).

I see what you're saying and would agree for the most part except that I would think that the WRs and TEs having playmakers would be the highest likelihood. We have Corneleus back, picked up BOTH #1 rated JUCO WR and TE, and have several 4* TEs on the roster in addition to that. We also have some playmakers at WR in Pettway and Deon Stewart. We should be fine at these positions, even with lack of experience

I think our biggest question will be at OL. We have plenty of experience but not much talent. Also losing RW3 will hurt badly in the run game. If we can rely upon Whaley to be a big time back is yet to be seen. Also depth at RB is a huge question mark. Even if Whaley is good, who's behind him?? No one with real experience.

The OL will be the single biggest factor in determining how our season goes, and IMO, one shouldn't get their hopes up at this point. They'll have to prove they are better rather than me just expecting it.

[onebadrubi]

Lines are not made to get 50/50 action and for Vegas to only make the 10% juice, not at all.  It's a myth to believe that.  There are lines every year that bait people.  Clemson vs auburn last year was one HUGE one that drew all kinds of Clemson money at -7 and even moved to -7.5 shortly before that Saturday.  Auburn lost by 6.  They get more of these right than they do wrong.  Just read their stories each week after NFL season and they will tell you which games they got bad wrong often.

[nwahogfan1]

6.5 is the number set by William Hill

Playing the Over is -150
Playing the Under is +130

I'd say that's a pretty good number.  I've already put $300(win $200) down on the over. 

Thanks Pork.  I have always said that when you put your money where your mouth is then you are not just running off at the mouth.  You believe in what your saying.  I hope you win.  If I was a betting man I would be right there with you.  I think we will win anywhere between 7 and 9. 

Go Hogs.

[onebadrubi]

Just to update, a lot of books now have the hogs line at 7 wins -110

[widespreadsooie]

Lines are not made to get 50/50 action and for Vegas to only make the 10% juice, not at all.  It's a myth to believe that.  There are lines every year that bait people.  Clemson vs auburn last year was one HUGE one that drew all kinds of Clemson money at -7 and even moved to -7.5 shortly before that Saturday.  Auburn lost by 6.  They get more of these right than they do wrong.  Just read their stories each week after NFL season and they will tell you which games they got bad wrong often.

Agree. Often times it seems one side may be getting most or all of the action but the line stays steady. AUB/ARK last season is another example.

No. I have friends that write the algorithms. Public perception is not in the formula. That's why the lines move after bets come it. Research it if you doubt me. I actually am done with this and don't care what you guys continue to believe.

I'm awfully interested in who your friend works for. 

[JayBell]

One game dictates to you what a win total the next year does?  That sounds almost like a biased or agenda driven remark?

And if you want to use spread covers or lack of as evidence of Bielema and the Hogs not covering the 6.5 win spread, you will lose that fight.  Bielema has killed the spreads overall the last 3-4 years.

And exactly what is my agenda?  You assigned so much more to my comment, I'm not even sure what you're accusing me of.

My point was Vegas was extremely confident Auburn, who wasn't having a great season, was going to pound Arkansas.  I thought Arkansas would easily cover and maybe even win.  You could tell Vegas was keeping it big, but not too big to keep people to take the under.

Add all that lead-in to the game and I could not have been more wrong.  Vegas knew it.  It's not that I'm basing anything off of one game.  It's that Vegas is right so much more often than we are and we tend to look more foolish when we accuse them of being foolish and that game hammered that home for me.

[JayBell]

Since I've moved away from Arkansas. My bias(not my love) has changed a bit.  I spent some time during the NBA Finals halftime and analyzed our schedule with a friend.  5-7 wins is the win range we came up with.  That is pre-bowl wins.  I bet that if most fans took away the "we are due to beat them" thoughts and think logically, they'd have a similar win range.

I wanted to argue with you, but I probably agree with you.  Though, I'd take the high end.  I think Arkansas easily gets to a bowl game.

Win the three weak home games, beat South Carolina on the road, beat Missouri at home and beat a down TCU at home and you can go to a bowl game without even having to beat an SEC West team.

I definitely have the "we are due to beat them" bias when it comes to A&M, but Ole Miss probably feels the same way about Arkansas.  That said, the Rebels are in disarray, LSU is underwhelming and Arkansas as a whole is probably better than Mississippi State again, but they've been Bielema's buggaboo, as have running quarterbacks.

Like a lot of years, I think Alabama is the only definite loss on the schedule.  Every other game is winnable under the right circumstances, but obviously Arkansas won't go 11-1.  I think 7 is the watermark, but I'm really hoping for 8 or 9 in the regular season because Bielema's seat is getting warm.

[hawganatic]

Lines are not made to get 50/50 action and for Vegas to only make the 10% juice, not at all.  It's a myth to believe that.  There are lines every year that bait people.  Clemson vs auburn last year was one HUGE one that drew all kinds of Clemson money at -7 and even moved to -7.5 shortly before that Saturday.  Auburn lost by 6.  They get more of these right than they do wrong.  Just read their stories each week after NFL season and they will tell you which games they got bad wrong often.

Wrong!!  Here's a good article that explains the concept.  The article is about 10 years old but the facts are the same.

Sportsbooks and casinos don't stay in business by taking risks.  They stay in business by minimizing risk and taking "overage" on the bet.  Too much to lose otherwise.

https://www.thespread.com/sports-betting-articles/091107-pointspreads-explained-how-bookmakers-set-the-betting-line

[onebadrubi]

Wrong!!  Here's a good article that explains the concept.  The article is about 10 years old but the facts are the same.

Sportsbooks and casinos don't stay in business by taking risks.  They stay in business by minimizing risk and taking "overage" on the bet.  Too much to lose otherwise.

https://www.thespread.com/sports-betting-articles/091107-pointspreads-explained-how-bookmakers-set-the-betting-line

Wrong!!!  See I'm more right because I used more explanation marks.  It's that easy. 

If what you were saying is the case we'd see larger line moves at times.  You'd also see all spread bets at -110 which isn't the case.  The books don't want 100% on one side, of course not.  They have multiple sources for coming up with a spread, they release spreads to "sharps" early and will adjust accordingly if all action comes a certain way, sure.   But they generally know which side of every spread the public is going to go on.  They will the. Tweak the number to anticipate large sums. 

They don't guess on outcomes, sure.  there will be multiple books this coming football season that give interviews talking about they are overexposed on said game for team X.   You watch how many times they win that over exposure play.  It's INSANE!   

Don't believe everything you read. 

[hawganatic]

Wrong!!!  See I'm more right because I used more explanation marks.  It's that easy. 

If what you were saying is the case we'd see larger line moves at times.  You'd also see all spread bets at -110 which isn't the case.  The books don't want 100% on one side, of course not.  They have multiple sources for coming up with a spread, they release spreads to "sharps" early and will adjust accordingly if all action comes a certain way, sure.   But they generally know which side of every spread the public is going to go on.  They will the. Tweak the number to anticipate large sums. 

They don't guess on outcomes, sure.  there will be multiple books this coming football season that give interviews talking about they are overexposed on said game for team X.   You watch how many times they win that over exposure play.  It's INSANE!   

Don't believe everything you read.

Wrong!!!!  (four, beat it...)  We wouldn't see -110 on both sides.  You have to give a bigger incentive to bet on the underdog.  Basic risk/reward concept.   

This is basic risk mitigation.  Every major corporation (at least ones that are successful) work to mitigate risk, not open themselves up to risk. 

[Al Boarland]

And exactly what is my agenda?  You assigned so much more to my comment, I'm not even sure what you're accusing me of.

My point was Vegas was extremely confident Auburn, who wasn't having a great season, was going to pound Arkansas.  I thought Arkansas would easily cover and maybe even win.  You could tell Vegas was keeping it big, but not too big to keep people to take the under.

Add all that lead-in to the game and I could not have been more wrong.  Vegas knew it.  It's not that I'm basing anything off of one game.  It's that Vegas is right so much more often than we are and we tend to look more foolish when we accuse them of being foolish and that game hammered that home for me.

It's been my experience that the least right are the optimistic message board posters.

[widespreadsooie]

Wrong!!!  See I'm more right because I used more explanation marks.  It's that easy. 

If what you were saying is the case we'd see larger line moves at times.  You'd also see all spread bets at -110 which isn't the case.  The books don't want 100% on one side, of course not.  They have multiple sources for coming up with a spread, they release spreads to "sharps" early and will adjust accordingly if all action comes a certain way, sure.   But they generally know which side of every spread the public is going to go on.  They will the. Tweak the number to anticipate large sums. 

They don't guess on outcomes, sure.  there will be multiple books this coming football season that give interviews talking about they are overexposed on said game for team X.   You watch how many times they win that over exposure play.  It's INSANE!   

Don't believe everything you read. 

This is also the way I've come to understand it. This is a guess, but I do believe the 50/50 concept applies more to games that are bet less. For instance, a Sun Belt basketball game on a Saturday. That game isn't drawing much action compared the board of 100+ games that day.

Wrong!!!!  (four, beat it...)  We wouldn't see -110 on both sides.  You have to give a bigger incentive to bet on the underdog.  Basic risk/reward concept.   

This is basic risk mitigation.  Every major corporation (at least ones that are successful) work to mitigate risk, not open themselves up to risk. 

Your referencing money lines. We're talking spreads. 

[JayBell]

It's been my experience that the least right are the optimistic message board posters.

The week before Bama is always fun.  "I just have this feeling we beat them."  "This is our year."  "My gut says this is the year we finally beat them."

[ricepig]

The week before Bama is always fun.  "I just have this feeling we beat them."  "This is our year."  "My gut says this is the year we finally beat them."

Some year they'll be right!!

[Porked Tongue]

It's gonna happen.  I gotta good vibe this year.

[DeltaBoy]

Never bet on the Hogs or the Cowboys they will break your heart and pocketbook!